There can’t be many parents around the world unaware of the plight of a beautiful little girl who was only three years old when she disappeared in 2007, writes Kay Burley in the Sunday People.

Not abducted, disappeared.

Immediately recognisable by her first name, Madeleine, the eldest of the McCann children disappeared one warm May evening in 2007 as her parents dined with friends in a restaurant at their resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

So much media attention, the name Madeleine is known world-wide. Her parents weren't dining nearby, but at a restaurant in the resort. Madeleine's parents were elsewhere when she disappeared.

Despite an Interpol search and worldwide publicity nothing has been seen of the little one since.

This week, seven years on, police from the Met have begun searching an area of scrubland near the apartment including a deep, concealed shaft and sewers.

Could this prove to be the final resting place?

Final resting place? A hint that a body was previously somewhere else?

Her parents, Kate and Gerry, who suffer every single day with the consequences of their actions that night have decided not to travel to Praia da Luz for this latest hunt for Madeleine.

Who can blame them?

They suffer with the consequences of their actions? What actions the reader may ask. And who can blame them? Well, perhaps parents reading this will be wondering if the McCanns are truly suffering from the consequences of the unmentioned actions.

Well, it would appear quite a few. I am absolutely staggered by the number of people on social media who think they know exactly what happened to little Madeleine.

Conspiracy theorists believe that it’s only a matter of time before the McCanns are held culpable for their daughter’s disappearance.

Kay Burley is telling readers that there are a helluva lot of people out there who do not believe the McCanns. She has told us that Madeleine disappeared while her parents were dining elsewhere, that in spite of world-wide media attention there has been no news and she has talked about "the consequences of their actions." By the time the Mirror readers have got this far, maybe some will be thinking the McCanns should be held culpable.

They point out Kate refused to answer some questions put her by the Portuguese police. Kate was with her lawyer when interviewed by the police.

She would have been advised what to say.

Questions she refused to answer? What questions?

The haters refer to cadaver dogs who showed ‘beyond doubt’ that a body must have been kept in the wardrobe of the apartment and then later driven in the McCann’s hire car to be buried.

Under the noses of the Portuguese police and the world’s press?

Well, now Mirror readers who have so far only read what the tabloids tell them know where a cadaver dog alerted.

Easy to dismiss such claims as Looney Tunes, but even a national newspaper was guilty of claiming the McCanns know more than they have told the police .

What national newspaper?

As a mother I am offended and appalled by such unfounded allegations.

Unfounded allegations? With no credible sighting and cadaver dog alerts?

Every morning the McCann’s must wake up only to be smothered by a blanket of guilt.

‘If only we’d done this…’

Well done, Kay Burley. You are telling the readers that the McCanns have done something they should feel guilty about.

They have always held on to the hope that Madeleine will be found alive.

So as the search continues, please ignore the haters and think instead of two desperate parents hundreds of miles away sitting by the phone and hoping against hope that nothing is found this time.

Nothing will be found this time?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________"You can run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Sooner or later God'll cut you down." (Johnny Cash)

Not Born Yesterday wrote:My initial reaction was that it was the usual sycophantic pile of manure but it is indeed cleverly written to put the other side of the story across.

I think it does it brilliantly. The McCanns must be waking every day with guilt about having been out dining with friends, there has been no trace of Madeleine since she disappeared and a cadaver dog alerted in the apartment and in the hire car. What's more, Kate McCann refused to answer questions and even a national newspaper thinks they're hiding something.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________"You can run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Sooner or later God'll cut you down." (Johnny Cash)

She seems to have dodged the ugly wrecking ball known as Carter Ruck by referring to facts in the guise of 'wot the haterz think'.

And yet even so, I have to ask myself if she alone is capable of such clever machinations ...

Ah well, I still won't be acquiring a Sky subscription no matter where the truth lies.

Almostgothic, I doubt very much she is clever enough to deliver such machinations, wonder if this is payback via Murdoch/phone tapping/suing?

We have a Sky subscription, and I would rather watch paint dry than to listen/watch Kay Burley, horrible woman, with the pretendy posh voice, how she achieved this job as a cough cough newscaster, I have no idea, and I really don't want to know.

I'm no fan of Kay Burley but whether intentionally or not, she has got across quite a few points which aren't usually given the light of day - the dogs, the unanswered questions, the dining out, the consequences of their actions.

wjk wrote:I just don't think the readers will think as deeply as we do, they will take it at face value. All of us who don't believe their version of events and say so on Social Media are Haters! End of.

I agree. This IS in the Mirror, and aimed at Mirror readers, after all.

Do you know what? If Kay Burley thinks I'm a Hater because I don't believe the McCanns guff, so be it! I can live with that!If she wants to come back after reading the files and educating herself, I might listen to her reasoning as to why we make 'unfounded allegations'!

She seems to have dodged the ugly wrecking ball known as Carter Ruck by referring to facts in the guise of 'wot the haterz think'.

And yet even so, I have to ask myself if she alone is capable of such clever machinations ...

Ah well, I still won't be acquiring a Sky subscription no matter where the truth lies.

That's exactly what she's done - referred to the facts, but avoided a Carter Rucking. One of the first things my daughter was taught on her journalism course was 'if you're going to slag someone off, get someone else to do it'.